[mcidas-x] FW: EXTERNAL: [McIDAS #ABG-678484]: netCDF and McIDAS

Hey Tom,

We got around to coming back to this issue and ran smack into a brick wall.  
Worse it's toward the end of another big project and this function is a key 
piece, so now I'm on the hook.  Looking for information more than actual code 
digging.  A new piece of information that surfaced was that when we generated 
netCDF files from the same BUFR point files on the 32 and 64-bit machines and 
ran ncdump on them, a comparison of the ncdump output showed only some rounding 
differences with the exception of the header info.  Ncdump had no problems 
displaying all of the data in the files.  What I would like from you is 
validation (or not) of my perception that this information shows we are 
creating the netCDF files correctly on the 64-bit system, but that ncdfks is 
having issues.  We found that the 'hacked' version of ncdfks was not required 
to read the files on the 32-bit systems; we are using the McIDAS core ncdfks.  
If this theory is correct, and SSEC tells me they have almost no one with any 
netCDF experience any more at least with the older McIDAS-X platforms so it's 
possible, then I can leave the transition software alone and focus on the 
server solution or eliminating the netCDF part completely and dumping it to 
some other structure.

Am I missing something here, do you think?  BTW we did make sure of all the 
linking issues before this.

Thanks,

Brice

-----Original Message-----
From: Biggerstaff, Brice A9
Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2013 8:26 AM
To: 'support-mcidas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx'
Subject: RE: EXTERNAL: [McIDAS #ABG-678484]: netCDF and McIDAS

Thanks, Tom.

We'll will look into the linking issue and get back to you.

Brice

-----Original Message-----
From: Unidata McIDAS Support [mailto:support-mcidas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2013 11:50 AM
To: Biggerstaff, Brice A9
Cc: support-mcidas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:support-mcidas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: EXTERNAL: [McIDAS #ABG-678484]: netCDF and McIDAS

Hi Brice,

re:
> You're probably not the exact person to ask this question, but maybe
> you can direct it to someone that might be able to give me a hint of
> trail to follow.

Ready...

re:
> We're up-converting to RHEL 6 and McIDAS 2012 and we've run into a
> puzzling issue concerning our in-house decode to NetCDF.  Since 2003
> we have been pulling BUFR point forecast files from NCEP and
> converting them to netCDF here and then serving them via McIDAS ADDE
> for in-house and the Cape Canaveral Air Force weather group.  One of
> our team hacked the netCDF code, version 3.6.2, a little to add a
> character string length and made a minor mod to the SSEC ncdfks server
> and we've been running fine.

I assume that you are aware that SSEC and Unidata McIDAS come bundled with a 
newer version of netCDF than 3.6.2.  Given this, it may be necessary for your 
team member to re-hack the netCDF code that McIDAS routines link against.

re:
> However, after we migrated the code to RHEL 6 64-bit we ran into an
> unexpected glitch.  The ncdfks server fails with a 'Dimension
> mismatch' error.

This sounds like either a 32 bit/64 bit problem (improperly declared variable, 
etc.) or linking against a different releases of netCDF than you think you are 
linking against.

re:
> The strangeness is that if I take one of the converted netCDF files
> and put it on a RHEL 4 32-bit system, the ncdfks there, (ours or the
> unmodified SSEC version) does not fail but gives good data.

This really does sound like a 32 vs 64 bit issue somewhere.

re:
> I've looked into the ncdfks code some (although it's in C and that's
> not my best language) and I've sent samples and corresponded with the
> MUG, but they confess to being puzzled as well and not possessing the
> highest of expertise in netCDF.  They suggested that I contact you
> guys.  So I'm still going slowly through the code, but if something
> rings a bell about the 32-bit vs 64-bit oddity to you or someone up
> there, I would appreciate any ideas.

I am willing to take a look to see if anything jumps out at me.  What I would 
need to do this is:

- list of code that your team member modified in the first place

  And the source for the modified routines.

- one or two example datasets (BUFR files and converted netCDF files)

I don't know exactly when I could get to the snooping, but I am willing to try 
when I get a chance.

Cheers,

Tom
--
****************************************************************************
Unidata User Support                                    UCAR Unidata Program
(303) 497-8642                                                 P.O. Box 3000
support@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:support@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>                       
            Boulder, CO 80307
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unidata HomePage                       http://www.unidata.ucar.edu
****************************************************************************


Ticket Details
===================
Ticket ID: ABG-678484
Department: Support McIDAS
Priority: Normal
Status: Closed


  • 2013 messages navigation, sorted by:
    1. Thread
    2. Subject
    3. Author
    4. Date
    5. ↑ Table Of Contents
  • Search the mcidas-x archives: